If I were Pinot Meunier I'd be feeling a little nervous. This thin-skinned red grape is grown extensively but almost exclusively in Champagne. A hairy mutation of Pinot Noir, Meunier earned its position as Champagne's most popular vine variety through reliability. Pinot Noir is often caught by Spring frosts; Meunier, which buds later, usually escapes them. It also ripens more quickly and easily than Pinot Noir. No small consideration in some of the world's most cool and northerly vineyards. On the whole, it is exigency, and not admiration, that is behind Meunier's popularity in Champagne.
As reported in the Drinks Business this week, the recent run of warmer vintages in Champagne have prompted some to question the viability of Pinot Meunier in the region, as growers plant Pinot Noir instead. Meunier's dependable amenability is no longer an asset; good wine is not made from grapes that have galloped to overripeness.
So, is our fruity, simple little friend is on the way out? Not entirely. In my experience, Pinot Meunier is capable of producing wines of quality and longevity when grown in the appropriate site, and treated with respect and not just spanked for yield and convenience. As Krug has demonstrated, Pinot Meunier is capable of complexity and longevity. I hope that what we are seeing here is one expression of the increasingly recognised nuance of the Champagne vignoble. The increase in independent Grower Champagnes has heightened awareness of this nuance. The wines of our own boutique Champagne house, Arlaux, are striking for their purity, precision and longevity. The Arlaux vineyards are in the tiny Premier Cru hamlet of Vrigny, one of the highest points on the Montagne de Reims. No grape is going to ripen quickly up here. Pinot Meunier from this little spot has been prized for centuries.
Rather than spank Pinot Meunier, maybe we should just be a little more thoughtful about what we expect it to do.
Tim Hall, an old friend and director of Scala School of Wine, has a great specialist knowledge of the wines of Champagne. I call him Lord Bubbles. He emailed me a few thoughts on the post above, and with his permission I'm adding it here as a comment. It's better than my original post, but I'm taking it on the chin!
ReplyDeleteComments from Tim Hall (http://www.scalawine.com):
I agree it is not all up for this derided grape, although for years, even though it is not allowed in grands crus, I’ve heard nothing but praise for it from producers – the single domaine producers of the Marne and the big houses rely on it very much. It is around 30-40% of the vignoble and I do not think we are about to see it pulled up. If anything, it is going to be even more sought after as a makeweight for rosé champagnes. The demand for very ripe pinot noir from Ambonnay and Bouzy and the rising price of it, to make still red fractions for rosés, is not sustainable. More PM will probably go into pink champagnes as a result.
As you say, its gift to Champagne is late budding. But it would be wrong to think this role is redundant with warmer springs and it seems, little frost. 30/40% of total production was lost in 2003 to frost early on, even though later it baked. Late spring frosts will still happen from time to time and because budburst is earlier these days, there will be the danger of even more damage, more buds to burn.
PM has other strengths too – it is less prone to coulure than PN or CH, very important in a region where flowering can be dodgy. It also has generally higher acidity than PN, unless cropped too high or pressed too hard (as it often is of course in Champagne) and it does not necessarily make flabby wine. On many north-facing sites it is very good. Climate change may well need some adjustments to viticulture for PM, but there’s no need to chuck the baby out with the bath water.
You are right to mention Krug’s belief in PM from good places for it like Leuvrigny. Look too at what Jerome Dehors can do with it the Marne. And Benoit Tarlant’s 100%PM wines Pierre de Bellevue and Vigne d’Or are masterly. As is Francis Egly-Ouriet’s ‘Les Vignes de Vrigny’, another 100%PM.
And PM adds variety to Champagne and champagne. One of the weaknesses of the region I think, is that too many wines taste very similar. In fact, as we all know, the big house methodology for NV, 90% of what they do, is to make the wine taste the same more or less year on year. PM adds to organoleptic variety and options. I think Champagne would be less interesting without it.